Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

And dig these:

Hmm...that last one looks familiar...I might have had a strum or two on it

dpowell wrote:Hmm...that last one looks familiar...I might have had a strum or two on it

BAD RONBO, KiLLeR DWaRfS wrote:dear mr. jingle...when you were mentioning about outsourcing to a small shop for producing a limited run of guitars out of house, we must also remember there is a pickup guy out there that produced a certain in demand electromagnetic product that was out of production since the late '60's...there could have been a licencing deal struck there, but it wasn't to be. would have been a legal profitable venture for both sides with no r&d or cash outlay on ric's part, just a royalty check in the coffers without lifting a finger save for a pen.

Ron, you are too kind in your salutations...

There is a productive way and a guaranteed non-productive way to deal with RIC in these issues. The non-productive way is the old CIA method--just do it and then seek permission or make your apologies after the fact. This "jump the gun--we'll get it worked out later" approach is guaranteed to fail.

There are some deals that go over with a "stroke of the pen" and royalty licensing money in the bank, but in the case of RIC, they do not involve guitar products in nearly every case.

Theres a video showing a tour of the RIC factory, and at one point you can see Grover Jackson entering data into the CNC computers. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like they would have scanned in the Capri's and F's at some point as well. Perhaps not with a future production run in mind, but just to have them cataloged should the need ever arise.

Not likely...at least at this point in time. Given the choice between archiving old material, and bringing current production up to date, streamlined and standardized, there's only one practical choice.

How different would a Capri be than a 350? Different body shape, Alder body (like they've done on some of the C series 325's) and thinner top and X-bracing, like they have recently put on the 360C63's. It seems to me that the tricky parts of the R&D have already been taken care of. It's not like they've never made a semi-hollow Alder bodied guitar with a neck through contruction in recent years. I personally think that if the 381 and 350 can sell decently, then a Capri would sell. That being said I have nothing but the utmost respect for the way that Rickenbacker runs things. If they genuinely feel that it isn't practical I can accept that. You never know though... Could happen. If it was priced similarly to a 360C63 I would buy it.

Danhalen wrote:How different would a Capri be than a 350? Different body shape, Alder body (like they've done on some of the C series 325's) and thinner top and X-bracing, like they have recently put on the 360C63's. It seems to me that the tricky parts of the R&D have already been taken care of. It's not like they've never made a semi-hollow Alder bodied guitar with a neck through contruction in recent years. I personally think that if the 381 and 350 can sell decently, then a Capri would sell. That being said I have nothing but the utmost respect for the way that Rickenbacker runs things. If they genuinely feel that it isn't practical I can accept that. You never know though... Could happen. If it was priced similarly to a 360C63 I would buy it.

It's not that it wouldn't sell, it's that their factory is already years behind schedule just making standard models. They want to reduce orders to eliminate the backlog, so introducing a new model that would increase orders and distract from streamlining the current model construction process would be counter productive.

That said, I wish there was a custom shop that could build capris/combos to 50's specs, like Paul makes the acoustics.

egosheep wrote:... It's not that it wouldn't sell, it's that their factory is already years behind schedule just making standard models. They want to reduce orders to eliminate the backlog, so introducing a new model that would increase orders and distract from streamlining the current model construction process would be counter productive. That said, I wish there was a custom shop that could build capris/combos to 50's specs, like Paul makes the acoustics.

Yet another voice of reason.

longhouse wrote:

I'll pre-order one of those in midnight blue, monty or walnut, with standard 360 wiring and pick-ups. I don't like the elongated R tailpiece, it looks weird... rather a trapezoid then! I think that would be ace... oh well, one can dream, eh!

egosheep wrote:Theres a video showing a tour of the RIC factory, and at one point you can see Grover Jackson entering data into the CNC computers. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like they would have scanned in the Capri's and F's at some point as well. Perhaps not with a future production run in mind, but just to have them cataloged should the need ever arise.

I can scan a guitar, have a model created and any number of out-of-work programmers within 10 miles of me could program the cnc for the price of one guitar.

teeder wrote: I can scan a guitar, have a model created and any number of out-of-work programmers within 10 miles of me could program the cnc for the price of one guitar.

That makes sense. I still don't quite understand the seemingly astronomical "tooling costs" cited. Hasn't the whole CNC thing made this process cheaper over time and far more streamlined?

Let's look at a 360F for example (no bias here, of course). Aside from the differences in body shape (but not body materials) from what RIC currently makes, the only piece of the puzzle here that RIC does not currently put on a guitar is either a) long trapeze tailpiece or b) long Accent vibrato, depending on which you would prefer to go with. So there would be some tooling required there, yes. But if the cost of scanning a guitar is the price of one guitar (and probably less since RIC has people in-house who do this), and RIC already has a few of these guitars sitting in their museum, where is the six-figure tooling cost coming from?

Not trying to bust anyone balls here (and I obviously understand that the backlog situation is the crux of the biscuit), just trying to understand!

no matter how cool it would be to have f body back or 4005 .... if there is something/anything coming back to lineup - my guess is low end/low cost 610,610/12, 4003s - tools of working man - it is something that can be done without any investment and it CAN sell to its target group..

grazioso wrote: my guess is low end/low cost 610,610/12, 4003s - tools of working man - ..

That would be the most boring reissues ever. No offense to the great 610 model, but what's there to get excited about...?

I'm still wishing for a 4001V68.